Jump to content


The T-62A fact sheet


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
206 replies to this topic

GehakteMolen #41 Posted 12 June 2012 - 06:01 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 51741 battles
  • 3,169
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    10-08-2010

View Posttheta0123, on 12 June 2012 - 04:59 PM, said:

The E50's gun is not good, its way way WAY better then the other T9 medium tanks there gun

The E50 has great armour and let us not forget that 60 ton weight being used in ramming mode

Problem is, most E50 drivers are idiots....

bassically these 3 things, i always was in doubt to buy or not buy E50, but given how hard these E50`s sometimes pwn i decided to get 1, 50k exp to go, and some shitload of credits, but i will get my E50 :p

theta0123 #42 Posted 12 June 2012 - 06:18 PM

    Brigadier

  • Beta Tester
  • 8222 battles
  • 4,481
  • [FHA] FHA
  • Member since:
    07-08-2010
Keep in mind, all T9 medium tanks are crap as stock. The E50 is not so crap but still can be a bit painfull

Sotahullu #43 Posted 12 June 2012 - 10:20 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 15540 battles
  • 684
  • Member since:
    10-15-2010

View Posttheta0123, on 12 June 2012 - 06:18 PM, said:

Keep in mind, all T9 medium tanks are crap as stock. The E50 is not so crap but still can be a bit painfull

Yeah, I remember from testserver when I got E-50, It needed tracks before it could mount anything. Well, try to kill Maus with 75L70 then you get the idea :Smile_veryhappy:


But I think devs are gonna change the name, to make things clear :Smile_trollface-3:

theta0123 #44 Posted 12 June 2012 - 11:00 PM

    Brigadier

  • Beta Tester
  • 8222 battles
  • 4,481
  • [FHA] FHA
  • Member since:
    07-08-2010
i helped my buddy grind for his E50 and when i had it fully stock....i just searched for any hill and just rammed my ass everywhere untill i got the tracks

T54 has a better gun at start. But at mid the E50 gets a much much better gun(Tracks researched and ON goes the 88mmL 71!). Grinding for everything else was fun

But i am now grinding the T54...i have everything exept the top gun

and this LB-1 makes it a nightmare

Edited by theta0123, 12 June 2012 - 11:01 PM.


UGBEAR #45 Posted 13 June 2012 - 02:15 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 16
  • Member since:
    06-11-2012
t-62 MAXIUM ROAD speed is 50km/h, so please bring the ultimate agility!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tupinambis #46 Posted 13 June 2012 - 03:36 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 1,509
  • Member since:
    12-22-2010

View PostHornet331, on 12 June 2012 - 03:03 PM, said:

And now WG realizes that it was a crap idea to go with a hybrid T54/55/62... suddenly the hybrid T54 we have in game is better then the supposed T62(A) :Smile_teethhappy:


I'm going to bet that the current tier 9 mediums and TD's are going to get nerfed slightly, simply because they are no longer end-line tanks [and, IMO, they're already better than the tier 9 heavies].

In this scenario, it would make sense for the T-54 to get its front hull armor reduced from 120mm to 100 [while the Patton and E-50 get damage nerfs, mobility nerfs, blah blah blah]. If nothing else the T-62a won't seem like a stupid downgrade.

Vernichtungswaffe #47 Posted 13 June 2012 - 07:12 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 24977 battles
  • 2,947
  • Member since:
    01-28-2011
When did the first prototype of the T-62A (Object 165) has been built/planned? Does it match the timeframe of WoT, which does not go beyond 1960?

Thanks.

Legault #48 Posted 13 June 2012 - 07:29 AM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 14706 battles
  • 2,342
  • Member since:
    10-11-2010

View PostFrankyK, on 13 June 2012 - 07:12 AM, said:

When did the first prototype of the T-62A (Object 165) has been built/planned? Does it match the timeframe of WoT, which does not go beyond 1960?

Thanks.
T62 as built in 1961. T62a came before the T62.


lolmath


But yes, it was late 50s. Which is fine considering the french tanks do go past 1960. Same with american guns.

gomolj #49 Posted 13 June 2012 - 07:43 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 25178 battles
  • 579
  • Member since:
    08-15-2011

View PostFrankyK, on 13 June 2012 - 07:12 AM, said:

When did the first prototype of the T-62A (Object 165) has been built/planned? Does it match the timeframe of WoT, which does not go beyond 1960?

Thanks.

There is no such limit given by WG. It is just somthing that people like to repet on the forums because they heard it "somewhere" The closest thing to that I heard was a russian Q&A thread a developer saying that smoothbore guns are where they draw the line. Further more, the game allready has tanks beyond that "limit" and even if it was in effect (which it isn't) the T-62A would match

mamlas #50 Posted 13 June 2012 - 08:56 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 14704 battles
  • 656
  • [-322-] -322-
  • Member since:
    12-22-2010
Im just afraid it will be utter crap. Already there are whines about the tank being OP...when its just a picture. If they whine it into what T-54 is now, compared to other T9s, god help us.

Fun part, new patton has more armor than this tank:D (110 vs 102 both at 60 degrees)

Edited by mamlas, 13 June 2012 - 09:09 AM.


gomolj #51 Posted 13 June 2012 - 12:16 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 25178 battles
  • 579
  • Member since:
    08-15-2011

View Postmamlas, on 13 June 2012 - 08:56 AM, said:

Im just afraid it will be utter crap. Already there are whines about the tank being OP...when its just a picture. If they whine it into what T-54 is now, compared to other T9s, god help us.

Fun part, new patton has more armor than this tank:D (110 vs 102 both at 60 degrees)

If the armor situation has reversed in favor of the patton than that means a reversal in the gun deparment in favor of the T-64a. The new soviet medium should have a superior gun or far far better mobility. The T-54 had to thank it armor and mobility for it sh*tty gun. With low armor there is no reason for the sub-par cannon compared to others. And I'll always trade some armor in a medium tank for better DPM and/or mobility.

sutyomatic #52 Posted 13 June 2012 - 02:08 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 50111 battles
  • 623
  • [GC] GC
  • Member since:
    03-07-2011

View Postgomolj, on 12 June 2012 - 08:12 AM, said:

Well, I got news for you... If you want to bounce stuff, go play heavy tanks. Mediums are about positioning, DPM, exploiting gaps in enemy lines.

The T-54 still is still the best brawler only the ammount of brain usage required to do so is increased.

Sorry that on an end tier medium tank that is a 60s MBT I would like to see some sort of armor protection againt tanks that are two tiers lower. I'm not saying that I want it to be able to bounce shots from 225mm pen guns on the UFP on a regular basis, but some of them.

The T54 already feels like paper mashe with all the retarded 260mm+ pen around and the MM most of us are getting. Usually bottom 3rd for me.

To be honest the T62A wont feel much of an upgrade compared to the T54. Acceleration might be a bit better, bit better DPM and the ability to sponge one shot more due to higher health pool. If they really leave that 100mm as top gun it will be superb let down.

Sad but true story is that I feel even more sorry for the German tech tree fans, who seemingly also get the same tank with the transmission moved to the back.

Hornet331 #53 Posted 13 June 2012 - 02:15 PM

    Colonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 16285 battles
  • 3,922
  • Member since:
    07-31-2010

View PostFrankyK, on 13 June 2012 - 07:12 AM, said:

When did the first prototype of the T-62A (Object 165) has been built/planned? Does it match the timeframe of WoT, which does not go beyond 1960?

Thanks.

Fist object 165 where finished November 1958 so you can say 1959.

Actually I would be fine with a T62A if it gets faster aim time and better accuracy on the move. It would be a hell of a tank this way, at least for my play stile. I don't rely on bouncing stuff with my T54, I get in position shot, scoot on hide, I am basically all over the map, which is easy in such tiny maps. But the biggest hindering right now is the horrible aim time.

Edited by Hornet331, 13 June 2012 - 02:15 PM.


gomolj #54 Posted 13 June 2012 - 02:31 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 25178 battles
  • 579
  • Member since:
    08-15-2011

View Postsutyomatic, on 13 June 2012 - 02:08 PM, said:

Sorry that on an end tier medium tank that is a 60s MBT I would like to see some sort of armor protection againt tanks that are two tiers lower. I'm not saying that I want it to be able to bounce shots from 225mm pen guns on the UFP on a regular basis, but some of them.

The T54 already feels like paper mashe with all the retarded 260mm+ pen around and the MM most of us are getting. Usually bottom 3rd for me.

To be honest the T62A wont feel much of an upgrade compared to the T54. Acceleration might be a bit better, bit better DPM and the ability to sponge one shot more due to higher health pool. If they really leave that 100mm as top gun it will be superb let down.

Sad but true story is that I feel even more sorry for the German tech tree fans, who seemingly also get the same tank with the transmission moved to the back.

First of the fact that the T-54 is " a 60s MBT" (which it isnt) has no effect on the game what so ever. The game balances tanks in terms of armor thickness/slope, firepower, mobility not by the decade something was built.  Older tanks dont suffer drawbacks because of it nor should newer tanks have unbalanced advantages because they are "newer". It is all about the in-tier balance in the previusly mentioned terms. As to your "less armor on a medium means it is automatically sh*t" theory the batchat should be the biggest piece of sh*t medium in the game. Yet it owns all other mediums in global win rate and somethimes in the game as well :-) since it was realesed. So take that 20mm of armor if you have to and give me more HP, better mobility and a more powerful gun. I can live with that.

sutyomatic #55 Posted 13 June 2012 - 03:47 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 50111 battles
  • 623
  • [GC] GC
  • Member since:
    03-07-2011

View Postgomolj, on 13 June 2012 - 02:31 PM, said:

First of the fact that the T-54 is " a 60s MBT" (which it isnt) has no effect on the game what so ever. The game balances tanks in terms of armor thickness/slope, firepower, mobility not by the decade something was built.  Older tanks dont suffer drawbacks because of it nor should newer tanks have unbalanced advantages because they are "newer". It is all about the in-tier balance in the previusly mentioned terms. As to your "less armor on a medium means it is automatically sh*t" theory the batchat should be the biggest piece of sh*t medium in the game. Yet it owns all other mediums in global win rate and somethimes in the game as well :-) since it was realesed. So take that 20mm of armor if you have to and give me more HP, better mobility and a more powerful gun. I can live with that.

Mate I have played lots of semi paper tanks like the T20 probably one of the most fun tanks in the game. I have Patton and E50 too wich I enjoy.
The BatChat ain't shit, because it has unique features that compansate for the lack of armor.

Now lets see what does the in-game T54 have...

...compared to its peers:
Does it have the best mobility? No.
Does it have the best armor? No.
Does it have the best view range? No.
Does it have the biggest health pool? No.
Does it have good gun depression? No.
Does it have the best penetration? No.
Does it have the best accuracy? No.
Does it have the best DPM? No.

What it does have:
Most expensive shell damage / cost wise.

Now that there is thing you can look forward to while grinding your way up the tree. Oh lol...


My biggest problem is that WG actually bothered to do T10 meds, and the only one to actually worth grinding for is the US one. German, USSR and I dare to say even the French are getting some copy-paste Tier9 med with a bit higher health pool and better DPM.

Probably the most unimaginative tech tree extension to date.

Edited by sutyomatic, 13 June 2012 - 03:48 PM.


Legault #56 Posted 13 June 2012 - 04:23 PM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 14706 battles
  • 2,342
  • Member since:
    10-11-2010
T62 used the T55 engine. We also get a 100mm gun. Radio will probably remain the same, tracks don't matter (probly 45-48 traverse), armor is roughly known and by no means special. Size will be the same as T-54, except lower (if WG isn't idiotic, like the IS being 2.73m, T-54 being 2.4m = same height ingame).


That gun is going to have to fire lasers to make this tank into anything remotely interesting.

Platypusbill #57 Posted 13 June 2012 - 04:50 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 25545 battles
  • 3,548
  • [WOOF] WOOF
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

View PostLord_WC, on 12 June 2012 - 12:03 PM, said:

Yet, with other nations t8 meds I absolutely have no problems to take it out
With gold ammo? They have 175, 180, 203 (or at best 232) penetration vs 195mm effective armour.
If a T-54 angles even slightly and doesn´t stay put (to avoid cupola hits), penetrating it is near impossible with lower tier meds other than the Lorraine.

UGBEAR #58 Posted 13 June 2012 - 04:55 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 16
  • Member since:
    06-11-2012
The only thing remain unkown is the stats of the "new" D-54T gun,

and T-62A was 100mm frontal amor for sure, and 50km/h ROAD speed for sure( in this game we could only find the maxium speed is lower than the historical speed) , the title agility is not adequate for T-62A anymore, the 100mm armor is.....

only hope is the gun now, but one thing for sure, the gun won't be any good~  just because the "suspicous russian bias" ~

emu87 #59 Posted 13 June 2012 - 05:21 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 8414 battles
  • 332
  • Member since:
    10-19-2010
Honestly looks like the most interesting T10 medium and the one, I'll invest in first *ticks off accelerated crew training*

Atomic_Emu #60 Posted 13 June 2012 - 08:43 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 10893 battles
  • 407
  • Member since:
    12-02-2010

View Postikiralight, on 13 June 2012 - 04:23 PM, said:

Size will be the same as T-54, except lower
Actually...

T-54 model 1946: length 6270 mm, width 3270 mm, height 2400 mm
T-62A: length 6630 mm, width 3318 mm, height 2352 mm

Note that the T-54 model 1946 is higher, because it had what in the game is its stock turret. T-54's height with "top" turret was ~2350 mm. Length is without gun barrel.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users